344 réponses à ce sujet

[Degs29]

Whatever. I don't buy alternate appearance packs or anything else superficial. I only buy DLC that adds gameplay content and even so I'm definitely not "embracing" that model of business.

[Xerxes52]

Siradix wrote...

Xerxes52 wrote...

As long as I can get all the items with in-game currency, then I don't really worry about microtransactions. I wouldn't want another RNG store however, I'd like to pick what I'm spending my in-game money on.

One thing I did like about microtransactions in ME3 though: Free DLC.

I assume that if EA is trying to push something like this, they will make the idea more appealing by making the other way a lot more tedious and mundane. The JRPG way would be to collect  20 items that have a very low drop rate, and the PC must have a high enough crafting ranking to actually create the object.

It's certainly a possibility. Unfortunately I don't see a way to prevent that from happening short of having some outside agency come in and force them to keep the ratio sane. That would probably work in the EU (they recently affirmed consumers' rights to resell digital products) but probably not in the United States.

Consumers could always form a watchdog group, but it wouldn't have any power beyond "naming and shaming" companies that do gouge in-game prices on MTs

[BroBear Berbil]

I'm a cheap bastard and I hate being nickel and dimed but I'm not seeing anything to really get upset about in this article. It seems like talking more about the framework of an in-game store (through Origin surely) within games. The things he said people could buy aren't very noteworthy though I wouldn't put it past EA, or anybody for that matter, to push it further.

For instance: Game too hard for you even on easy? Buy the Dragon Age III Potion Pack!

While I would never buy something like that, there's someone who would. There always is.

As for your run of the mill story/character/costume/etc. DLCs they've been a part of games for awhile now so it's more than a little late to say

This is NOT what I want in my games.

Even Dragon Age: Origins was pretty obnoxious about advertising in game. Remember Warden's Keep?

I've long since stopped worrying about DLC. I get pretty much all the DLC for the games I buy. But, like I said, I'm a cheap bastard so I get it all in GOTY editions and sales. It makes it more palatable.

Modifié par OnionXI, 28 février 2013 - 08:01 .

[Robhuzz]

I'm a cheap bastard and I hate being nickel and dimed but I'm not seeing anything to really get upset about in this article. It seems like talking more about the framework of an in-game store (through Origin surely) within games. The things he said people could buy aren't very noteworthy though I wouldn't put it past EA, or anybody for that matter, to push it further.

And they will push it further. They've been testing the waters for years, pushing and pushing very slowly to see how much gamers would take. Now we've reached mictrotransactions in single player games (essentially now you have to pay for cheats). The next step will most likely be to make the single player become less attractive if you don't buy microtransactions, but it'll happen very gradually so as to not cause an uproar.

It's certainly a possibility. Unfortunately I don't see a way to prevent that from happening short of having some outside agency come in and force them to keep the ratio sane. That would probably work in the EU (they recently affirmed consumers' rights to resell digital products) but probably not in the United States.

Gamers thinking for themselves and realizing they're being cheated would be a good first step. Band together and refrain from buying games that do this is all that's needed. Once EA feels it in their wallets, they'll change their ways.

[chuckles471]

LinksOcarina wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

So what about those who bought TF 2 at full price, like me?

God, you are really trying hard to white knight EA, you can still play the game, it's free.  Yes, it was a retail game part of the orange box published by EA when it came out, I got it for playstation when it came out.  But Valve saw they wouldn't be able to still charge for the game and microtransactions for whatever reason(maybe common sense and fairness) and made it free to play. 

Can you just admit that EA has(and has been getting worse) bad business practices when it comes to microtransactions and stop trying to defelct the blame at everyone else.  You are making Jim Sterling look like Walter Cronkite of video game journalism.

I'm not white knighting anyone. I am simply pointing out a double standard. EA has made bad business practices. They just haven't made bad practices with microtransactions, at least in the major, AAA market, i'm not sure about iOS markets to be honest. And I rightfully can blame others for doing so when they have, and call out the common charge of "I won't buy a game from a company promoting microtransactions" as bull****.  

By the way, you are basically telling me that if EA decided to make a game go fully free to play, and changed their microtransaction plan to something that mimics Team Fortress 2, it would be ok. So if say Mass Effect 3's multiplayer goes free to play and mixes things up to that model, it would ok to you then, am I correct? 

And no, Sterling is not Walter Cronkite, he is Perez Hilton. 

Yes, as long as there isn't a price wall and it becomes a seperate game.  You can do what you want, but ME3 MP isn't, so is a rip off IMO.  And it's connection to SP before EC made it a disgrace.
Also, yes they have had bad business practices when it comes to AAA-games, alot of people disagree with you.  It also not a double standard, most gamers know who the bad guys are.  That is why EA, Activision, Capcom, Square-Enix etc get **** but EA seems to be pushing the bad practices harder than anyone else.
And some of us don't want DA3 to follow EAs new business plan.

This assumes someone is being a bad guy. 

Also, how is the multiplayer in Mass Effect 3 ripoff, because of that connection? Did you play it to discern how fair it was? Also, how can it be unfair when its co-op multiplayer, not versus deathmatch, where weapon output is just as important? 

And how is this not a double standard if companies are all following the same practices? You can say some do it better than others, but blanket statements like I quoted before make such accusations a double standard.

I also want to point out, you are basically telling me that microtransactions are ok within your own personal standards. Should all games follow those standards as well to be acceptable? 

Look under my avatar, Sherlock.
Same practices, less ****y.  Remember that?
And for the thrid time, for a FREE game.  Stop trying to put words in my mouth, that is a Perez Hilton move.  Unless EA have a major breakdown, DA3 wont be free.

[chesschamp]

I'd buy a second version without microtransactions. Hell, I'd pay /more/ for the version without microtransactions.

[Icinix]

chesschamp wrote...

I'd buy a second version without microtransactions. Hell, I'd pay /more/ for the version without microtransactions.

You know what - I would too.

Same as paying extra for having all DLC provided at no extra cost (kind of like Cerberus Network).

[SpunkyMonkey]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Thats the other problem. Most of this hatred is unfounded at this point. Sort of blind hatred for past trangressions ten years ago. EA is a lot different from then. Hell, I wrote an editorial about this months ago and got the standard internet death threats for touching the sacred cow. 

Addtional in game content does not mean its disc locked, thats just a presumption. Faster level ups I presume mean the levelling seen in the original tetris, where things go faster. Faster level ups is nothing major really. As for the future DLC, I don't know what that would entail. 

I agree the price might not be right though, although this is the first time I ever heard of Tetris for the iOS. 

If you step back and look at the bigger picture I think gamers are jusr p'd off at EA because it's now starting to feel as if EA are out for cash and nothing more. it may have alwasy been the case, but at least their actions didn't make gamers feel that way. The whole DLC/microtransactions/online gaming culture is constantly pushing towards giving us less product, whilst expecting us to spend more money on that lesser product too - no wonder people are fed up.

People are annoyed at getting less bang for their buck - simple as that really. Some may argue that isn't the case and that all optional extras are just that, but you only have to look at games such as Arkham City & ME3 to see how stripped back they've become compared to earlier games in the series.

The sad thing is that very few of thethe devs, creative forces, or lads on the shop floor will see any of that extra profit.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 28 février 2013 - 09:04 .

[BroBear Berbil]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Thats the other problem. Most of this hatred is unfounded at this point. Sort of blind hatred for past trangressions ten years ago. EA is a lot different from then. Hell, I wrote an editorial about this months ago and got the standard internet death threats for touching the sacred cow. 

Addtional in game content does not mean its disc locked, thats just a presumption. Faster level ups I presume mean the levelling seen in the original tetris, where things go faster. Faster level ups is nothing major really. As for the future DLC, I don't know what that would entail. 

I agree the price might not be right though, although this is the first time I ever heard of Tetris for the iOS. 

If you step back and look at the bigger picture I think gamers are jusr p'd off at EA because it's now starting to feel as if EA are out for cash and nothing more. it may have alwasy been the case, but at least their actions didn't make gamers feel that way. The whole DLC/microtransactions/online gaming culture is constantly pushing towards giving us less product, whilst expecting us to spend more money on that lesser product too - no wonder people are fed up.

People are annoyed at getting less bang for their buck - simple as that really. Some may argue that isn't the case and that all optional extras are just that, but you only have to look at games such as Arkham City & ME3 to see how stripped back they've become compared to earlier games in the series.

The sad thing is that very few of thethe devs, creative forces, or lads on the shop floor will see any of that extra profit.

This.

People should really do what I do and just wait for all the DLCs to get bundled and for the game to go on sale. I just finished Arkham City last week. I picked up the GOTY version on steam during the holiday sale and I cannot imagine having played it without all the DLC.

For that same reason I'm holding off on buying Borderlands 2, Dishonored, and some other big titles until all the DLC is out, bundled, and on sale. Yeah, they're last year's games but I end up getting the complete game for $20-30. If people did this then the rampant DLC practices would probably be curbed but it won't happen because the desire for day 1 games is so high.

[SpunkyMonkey]

OnionXI wrote...

This.

People should really do what I do and just wait for all the DLCs to get bundled and for the game to go on sale. I just finished Arkham City last week. I picked up the GOTY version on steam during the holiday sale and I cannot imagine having played it without all the DLC.

For that same reason I'm holding off on buying Borderlands 2, Dishonored, and some other big titles until all the DLC is out, bundled, and on sale. Yeah, they're last year's games but I end up getting the complete game for $20-30. If people did this then the rampant DLC practices would probably be curbed but it won't happen because the desire for day 1 games is so high.

Spot on. I only played the original Arkham City because it was an birthday gift and was planning on doing exactly the same as yourself, but was bought it ahead of time.

I rushed through the game as the constant hints at villians and events which I'd yet to see made me think that more was to come, next thing you know I've finished it.

A very, very overated game which wasn't a patch on the previous one and pretty lacking without all the DLC etc.

[Captain Crash]

Optional micro-transactions don't bother me. As said they are optional and if you want some extra equipment or help then I think its fair you can pay to get some.

I not ever seen micro-transactions being shoved down my throat as some people are making out. Additionally I've not ever seen myself missing out on awesome content because of micro-transactions either.

Modifié par Captain Crash, 28 février 2013 - 10:49 .

[Robhuzz]

OnionXI wrote...

People should really do what I do and just wait for all the DLCs to get bundled and for the game to go on sale. I just finished Arkham City last week. I picked up the GOTY version on steam during the holiday sale and I cannot imagine having played it without all the DLC.

For that same reason I'm holding off on buying Borderlands 2, Dishonored, and some other big titles until all the DLC is out, bundled, and on sale. Yeah, they're last year's games but I end up getting the complete game for $20-30. If people did this then the rampant DLC practices would probably be curbed but it won't happen because the desire for day 1 games is so high.

QFT. If gamers took a stand for once instead of just falling for all the hype and overmarketing and follow it like sheep, we wouldn't even have these practices. By refraining from buying into this we could force developers to once again focus on making good games, instead of ways to make as much money as possible, then building a game around that.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Captain Crash wrote...

Optional micro-transactions don't bother me. As said they are optional and if you want some extra equipment or help then I think its fair you can pay to get some.

I not ever seen micro-transactions being shoved down my throat as some people are making out. Additionally I've not ever seen myself missing out on awesome content because of micro-transactions either.

Compare.....

ME to ME3

Arkham Asylum to Arkham City

DA:O to DA:2

Dead Space to Dead Space 3

etc.

The recent shift in philosiphy is encouraging game companies to produce sub-standard games. DLC and Microtransactions give those companies a reason/excuse to release rushed & unfinished products.

Robhuzz wrote...

QFT. If gamers took a stand for once
instead of just falling for all the hype and overmarketing and follow it
like sheep, we wouldn't even have these practices. By refraining from
buying into this we could force developers to once again focus on making
good games, instead of ways to make as much money as possible, then
building a game around that.

This!^

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 28 février 2013 - 11:09 .

[Tup3x]

I hate them. They already made ME3 MP so that you have to sacrifice your entire life (=be massive MP addict) if you want to unlock everything. DLCs are fine as long as I get ; what I pay for, micro transactions are just annoying.

Modifié par Tup3xi, 28 février 2013 - 11:00 .

[Captain Crash]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

The recent shift in philosiphy is encouraging game companies to produce sub-standard games. DLC and Microtransactions give those companies a reason/excuse to release rushed & unfinished products IMO.

I know you and a lot of people hate them.  I have no love for them either.  But saying micro-transactions results in unfinished and sub-standard games is a load of non-sense and pretty insulting to the developers I would say.

ME3 and Arkham City certainly were not worse games because of the inclusion of optional micro purchases

Modifié par Captain Crash, 28 février 2013 - 11:12 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

Captain Crash wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

The recent shift in philosiphy is encouraging game companies to produce sub-standard games. DLC and Microtransactions give those companies a reason/excuse to release rushed & unfinished products IMO.

I know you and a lot of people hate them.  I have no love for them either.  But saying micro-transactions results in unfinished and sub-standard games is a load of non-sense and pretty insulting to the developers I would say.

ME3 and Arkham City certainly were not worse games because of the inclusion of optional micro purchases

I'd say they were. The core games lacked content and quality, and if the resources used to develop Micropurchases were directed towards the main game instead they would have been better for it.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 28 février 2013 - 11:22 .

[Captain Crash]

Well if you say so, personally I think you got the idea that micro-transactions are so evil that they could blot out the sun. I really cant see how there inclusion has detracted from the main game in anyway. In fact if they can make some extra money hasn't that helped fund the main game to make it better?!

You cant say it hasn't with any certainty. Without knowledge of how resources in game like ME3 are allocated its all hypothetical. But I can say this, micro-transactions arn't going away and they do make business sense, as the OP has shown. Yeah its not a nice way of doing things, but if it makes money can you blame developers?

Try as you do to say its ruining games, I go back to my original point of they are optional and nothing is forcing it upon you.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Captain Crash wrote...

Well if you say so, personally I think you got the idea that micro-transactions are so evil that they could blot out the sun. I really cant see how there inclusion has detracted from the main game in anyway. In fact if they can make some extra money hasn't that helped fund the main game to make it better?!

You cant say it hasn't with any certainty. Without knowledge of how resources in game like ME3 are allocated its all hypothetical. But I can say this, micro-transactions arn't going away and they do make business sense, as the OP has shown. Yeah its not a nice way of doing things, but if it makes money can you blame developers?

Try as you do to say its ruining games, I go back to my original point of they are optional and nothing is forcing it upon you.

How do miicrotransastions, which make money after both they and the game are released and sold, help make a game or it's development better pre-release?

And I can say with 100% certainty that since DLC and microtransactions have arrived that gaming quality has dipped noticeably, and that far more games feel unfinished and lacking.

It's simple - as a general rule, if you have 10 people to work with then put all 10 on game development and you'll have a better game than if you put 8 on it and 2 on microtransactions.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 28 février 2013 - 11:37 .

[Captain Crash]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

It's simple - as a general rule, if you have 10 people to work with then put all 10 on game development and you'll have a better game than if you put 8 on it and 2 on microtransactions.

Yeah, theres a big logic hole in that statement which you havent figured out.

But this isnt going anywhere so will leave it things as they are. 

Modifié par Captain Crash, 28 février 2013 - 11:46 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

Captain Crash wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

It's simple - as a general rule, if you have 10 people to work with then put all 10 on game development and you'll have a better game than if you put 8 on it and 2 on microtransactions.

Yeah, theres a big logic hole in that statement which you havent figured out.

But this isnt going anywhere so will leave it things as they are. 

Is it as big a hole as which is found in making a statement which claims to have noticed a hole in another statement, but which doesn't tell us what that hole is? lol

Please, enlighten me.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 28 février 2013 - 12:00 .

[Milan92]

Captain Crash wrote...

Optional micro-transactions don't bother me. As said they are optional and if you want some extra equipment or help then I think its fair you can pay to get some.

I not ever seen micro-transactions being shoved down my throat as some people are making out. Additionally I've not ever seen myself missing out on awesome content because of micro-transactions either.

This.

[redBadger14]

If they're optional and there's a separate way to obtain the content through playing the game, then what's the issue? Nothing.

Dead Space 3 is a perfect example. The Resource Packs, which give you resources and weapon parts, scaling up in pack sizes, cost Ration Seals or real-money. Ration Seals you earn in-game by regularly sending out your Scavenger Bots. You can also pay money to obtain these packs if you so desire. I was able to get very many packs with ration seals in one playthrough, and haven't had to pay money.

Honestly people, if you have some huge problem with microtransactions, lighten up.

[Fawx9]

Wait what was wrong with Arkham City DLC? There was only 1 story released and it was HQ:Revenge.

Unless you're counting the Catwoman segments, but those were free with a new game anyways.

[MaxQuartiroli]

What really bothers me is to know wheter or not they are planning to introduce these microtransactions in a way that could affect also SP campaigns.. as an example: do you remember the infamous missing war assets in ME3 to get the so called "breath ending"? In that case you could get them by playing multiplayer (or if you were a PC user by cheating). Now, let's suppose that in the game if you want those WA you could also buy them for $5. This is what they could also imply for "microtransation"

They could also apply the same thing in future games (let's say DA3 since this is the dedicated forum) for some items that allow you to complete some side quests that are not mandatory to complete the game, but that allow you to get the perfect ending (for example your companions' quest). Without them you will be able to complete the game someway, but if you want a better ending or the PERFECT ending perhaps you will be forced to buy some items in order to unlock some options and pay a small fee for them.

If this is what they have in their mind so I agree with the OP and I also say "This is NOT what I want in my games". On the other way if these microtransations will be only for alternative pack/gears or for something that can simply help you to finish the game in a faster way, but not in a BETTER way, then I won't mind them at all.

What is most important is just that they let me free to decide, not like they did with the missing war assets in ME3. I suppose that we'll have an answer when DA3 will be out.

Modifié par MaxQuartiroli, 28 février 2013 - 03:33 .

[Everwarden]

Nomadiac wrote...

Bioware knows that its image isn't in the greatest state right now, and I'm sure they also know that microtransactions in a single-player game will ****** off a lot of people. I doubt we'll see them in DA3.

I'm betting you're wrong. At this point I don't think Bioware cares much about what the fans think of them. Honestly, I'm starting to get the impression they hate their fans. The rejection ending in Mass Effect 3 seemed like a huge middle finger to everyone who hated the starchild. 

On topic: If I hear Dragon Age III is stellar, I may buy it used. I won't be buying any DLC--not even because I hate DLC, but because Bioware DLC tends to be overpriced and underwhelming, and I make it a policy to never, ever buy "item pack" DLC.